Hmmmm that's odd. I noticed a error like that when running xgalaga from cli in 5.9 Gold. The fonts are there, but I've no clue how to resolve. Actually the fonts were a adobe variant. But much the same error.

I made a config file for JWM where it's barebone and only the working menu entries are included.

If you create a file in the home directory called .jwmrc and paste the following content in there it gives you a little better idea of what's included and not. Unlike Fluxbox, you have to restart JWM to see the results of any edits.

If you use Opera 9.25 (current non-beta version), you can get Flash by using Flash 7 that can be downloaded from http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/installers/archive/fp7_archive.zip. Unzip it and select the directory with the Flash 7 Linux player. Then copy libflashplayer.so and flashplayer.xpt into /usr/lib/opera/plugins. Make libflashplayer.so executable. In Opera's Tools menu, Preferences, Advanced, Downloads edit swf and any other Flash files to use the plugin in Opera's plugin directory.

Flash 7 works fine with Opera prior to 9.50b1. I don't install the Opera beta that comes with 5.9 Standard because it changes the e-mail format and makes it incompatible with the non-beta Opera. Since I share my Opera mail files with Windows, I don't want this to happen because I don't want to install the Opera beta on all my systems. I couldn't get Flash in Opera in VL5.9 because the Flash that comes with VL 5.9 is too new for Opera 9.25 and doesn't work. Since I've installed the Flash 7 plugin in Opera 9.25 Flash is working fine.--GrannyGeek

As I read through these messages and suggested inclusions, I keep wondering what the target market is for VL Light. First there was talk about people with really old computers (too weak for 5.9 Standard) and slow Internet connections that made a smaller ISO desirable. Then I saw talk about developers who would be attracted to VL through this Light version (though I can't imagine why the Light version would do it but Standard and SOHO wouldn't). The programs mentioned for inclusion do not seem to me to be the type that would appeal to a user with an antique computer. I assume that such a user would not be into computers very deeply--sort of like Uncle Mike who got a computer in 1994 and hasn't gone for anything newer. So for that type of user, these geeky command line programs no "normal" user ever heard of are not going to have much appeal.

And I can't imagine a body of potential developers hanging onto their antique hardware with dialup and thus being interested in developing VL-Light. There is a limit to how antique anyone who really cares about computing is willing to be.

So who is this VL-Light geared to? Will a "normal" user who is hardware-challenged really want Flash-less browsers, no icons, a very unWindows-like desktop, etc., etc.? I don't want to sound unkind, but what I'm seeing now is a group of geeks creating a minimalist distro with their favorite minimalist apps. It's like "VL Standard isn't lean enough for me. Let's see how lean we can make it." And I'm not using "geek" as an insult term--not at all.

Also, if the ISO is so small because you're worried about download time for these hardware-challenged users, how are they going to get all the stuff that's missing onto their computers? Will they want to be downloading all this stuff from the repos? I don't see that you save them much with a 300-meg ISO if they have to download another 200 megs to get what they want that's not in the ISO.--GrannyGeek

Good points GrannyGeek, all of them. But once again all of us are different. My take on the Lite version is getting a slender but useful install. Then if the user would like, they may cherrypick the apps that they prefer, creating a perfect install with low overhead. Time and time again we have users pleading for a smaller sized iso for whatever reason. Now VL is attempting to deliver. Even as a smaller product, it may be useful for many categories of users. Many users feel even Standard is bloated. And it is if you step back and look at it. It caters quite a lot to the majority. But in the end, we have many apps installed by default that are never executed.

And besides... with a smaller development effort, it's another spark of activity for us on DW.

From here I need anyone who wants to have a say in the apps that will be in this to install the ISO, try the apps already there, download any they think should be there from gslapt, and post back here their findings.I need people to try siag and pw and tell us what they think.install abiword and deps to get it running and tell us how it does and how much (in MB) they had tro download to get it working.

Siag Office: Loads and runs very fast. It has some interesting integrated apps like xedplus and xfiler. Other entries like calculator and egon don't do anything.

Personally, I find the suite early -90's looking and rather confusing. The keyboard shortcuts I'm used to do not work. Edit/copy/paste is hit and miss. Many fonts look and behave weird to the point where they are unusable.